André wrote:I agree with slappybrown to some extent. Looking past game two the Pens had more posts and good scoring chances missed than the opposition and whatever the standard amount is. No doubt. A sweep is a sweep, nonetheless, there's no saying the Bruins just weren't that much better.

The bruins didn't hit any posts or have any close chances that didn't go in? Horton hit a post before Adams in the OT game yet nobody brings that up?

Our chances overall were not that great as chances or in numbers. Scoring chances are not real stats just like NFL tackles. We barely came as close to scoring as people seem to think, the series was never in doubt.

Anyone who thinks that way to me is looking for a reason to excuse the loss (like Philly was just a bad matchup). We had fundamental flaws in roster and system that were exposed. I really just can't believe anyone watched any of our games and other series and thought we actually carried the play or a little luck and we would have been right in it.

Other teams cycle and swarm and come in waves we don't. Boston had a nice game plan that might have cost them a game by being passive in the series at most but basically just shut us down. They turned in the offense a bit more vs Chicago but against had no need to. Play smart and don't take chances and we were toast.

André wrote:I agree with slappybrown to some extent. Looking past game two the Pens had more posts and good scoring chances missed than the opposition and whatever the standard amount is. No doubt. A sweep is a sweep, nonetheless, there's no saying the Bruins just weren't that much better.

The bruins didn't hit any posts or have any close chances that didn't go in? Horton hit a post before Adams in the OT game yet nobody brings that up?

Our chances overall were not that great as chances or in numbers. Scoring chances are not real stats just like NFL tackles. We barely came as close to scoring as people seem to think, the series was never in doubt.

Anyone who thinks that way to me is looking for a reason to excuse the loss (like Philly was just a bad matchup). We had fundamental flaws in roster and system that were exposed. I really just can't believe anyone watched any of our games and other series and thought we actually carried the play or a little luck and we would have been right in it.

Other teams cycle and swarm and come in waves we don't. Boston had a nice game plan that might have cost them a game by being passive in the series at most but basically just shut us down. They turned in the offense a bit more vs Chicago but against had no need to. Play smart and don't take chances and we were toast.

I'm not looking for some excuse or anything like that. I just have a different opinion about how the series went. That's it. They weren't good enough to win the Cup, but it wasn't as bad as it seemed in that series. ¯\(°_o)/¯

I have a vague recollection that this was a common sentiment in the GDT and post-mortem day after threads, but whatever, seems like most don't feel this way. Don't know why its getting people worked up, but let's back to the biggest issue in this thread:

I have a vague recollection that this was a common sentiment in the GDT and post-mortem day after threads, but whatever, seems like most don't feel this way. Don't know why its getting people worked up, but let's back to the biggest issue in this thread:

THE END OF WWE KENNEDY ANNOUNCEMENTS AT THE CEC

$100 when TK scores vs the Pens in Pittsburgh next year, he gets the Kennedy....Kennedy treatment when the score report is read over the PA.

André wrote:I agree with slappybrown to some extent. Looking past game two the Pens had more posts and good scoring chances missed than the opposition and whatever the standard amount is. No doubt. A sweep is a sweep, nonetheless, there's no saying the Bruins just weren't that much better.

The bruins didn't hit any posts or have any close chances that didn't go in? Horton hit a post before Adams in the OT game yet nobody brings that up?

Did I say that?

I said "Looking past game two the Pens had more posts and good scoring chances missed than the opposition and whatever the standard amount is."

I recall the Pens had 7 shots go off the posts in game 1 and 3 or something around that number.

He was perplexed that he wasn’t regularly in the lineup for the Penguins, who were swept by Boston in the Eastern Conference finals. Kennedy played in just two games in that series.

“I’m not really sure. I thought I had a great playoff, and I’m kind of stumped,” said Kennedy, who had two goals and three assists in nine playoff games. “I’m really kind of lost why they didn’t play me more.

He was perplexed that he wasn’t regularly in the lineup for the Penguins, who were swept by Boston in the Eastern Conference finals. Kennedy played in just two games in that series.

“I’m not really sure. I thought I had a great playoff, and I’m kind of stumped,” said Kennedy, who had two goals and three assists in nine playoff games. “I’m really kind of lost why they didn’t play me more.

André wrote:I agree with slappybrown to some extent. Looking past game two the Pens had more posts and good scoring chances missed than the opposition and whatever the standard amount is. No doubt. A sweep is a sweep, nonetheless, there's no saying the Bruins just weren't that much better.

The bruins didn't hit any posts or have any close chances that didn't go in? Horton hit a post before Adams in the OT game yet nobody brings that up?

Did I say that?

I said "Looking past game two the Pens had more posts and good scoring chances missed than the opposition and whatever the standard amount is."

I recall the Pens had 7 shots go off the posts in game 1 and 3 or something around that number.

I guess I find it funny that I'm defending a theory that a team gets swept and scores a historic low amount of goals wasn't the victim of bad luck or circumstance like a hot goalie (who didn't really play out if his mind).

Again the hawks hit a post and then .000005 seconds later won a cup.

It wasn't closer than it appeared, it was exactly what was indicated. A team got throttled, but hey three point shots that trickled wide count for "real chances" and stats to make a case.

I guess I just think I am the only one who watched other playoff series to see what it actually means to get scoring chances. The pens had less solid chances all series as the losing teams in wester conference did per game or even half a game all playoffs. Skating and playing perimeter equals swept.

Everyone here watched the series. A lot of people here watched every other series; I know I did. Just because we disagree with you doesn't mean that we didn't watch or that you have some kind of final authority that everyone must agree with. It's ok that we disagree, and the fact that there are more than a few that do means it sure isn't "plain as day."

Froggy wrote:I'm already on record as saying I'm gonna miss him, but this was a great trade

When he played regular top 6 minutes and PP minutes he put up numbers and earned a contract that ceased to make sense as a healthy scratch. The Pens indecision isn't TK's fault. Was it a great trade? No idea.

slappybrown wrote:Everyone here watched the series. A lot of people here watched every other series; I know I did. Just because we disagree with you doesn't mean that we didn't watch or that you have some kind of final authority that everyone must agree with. It's ok that we disagree, and the fact that there are more than a few that do means it sure isn't "plain as day."

Fair enough. I'm not the final authority it's my opinion because nobody adds much beyond "they had chances and were unlucky".

My point is I watched The other series and saw how many times or games losing teams actually carried play beyond the pens puck possession which in my mind was more appearance than real.

So my question is pick a series (Kings vs Hawks). The Kings played well and dominated at points, if you watched that series and the Pens - bruins series side by side focusing on the Kings do you still think the Pens carried the play much and had a lot of actual chances or that it wasn't really as bad as it seemed?

If so ill drop this because our opinions are way to far apart on what carrying the play and chances mean.

My opinion on the pens series bein 4-0 is spot on mostly on the basis of watching other series. So many close chances, the teams that kept pressing broke through with goals.

He was perplexed that he wasn’t regularly in the lineup for the Penguins, who were swept by Boston in the Eastern Conference finals. Kennedy played in just two games in that series.

“I’m not really sure. I thought I had a great playoff, and I’m kind of stumped,” said Kennedy, who had two goals and three assists in nine playoff games. “I’m really kind of lost why they didn’t play me more.

I actually agree with him, yet don't really care. A second rounder is good value for him.